Post by B on Oct 2, 2017 12:33:43 GMT -5

In the video he says "No one could have survived a crash like that", but then says that perhaps 'he' (meaning Paul) could have jumped out in order to save his life.Years later he denied ever saying that Paul was dead.

hotman wrote

He does say Faul is the Devil but does not mention God being a woman!

Why would he? It's totally irrelevant to what he was talking about. He didn't talk about his record collection either.

Post by Rubber Soul on Oct 2, 2017 13:54:53 GMT -5

In the video he says "No one could have survived a crash like that", but then says that perhaps 'he' (meaning Paul) could have jumped out in order to save his life.Years later he denied ever saying that Paul was dead.

Post by hotman637 on Oct 2, 2017 18:32:30 GMT -5

In the video he says "No one could have survived a crash like that", but then says that perhaps 'he' (meaning Paul) could have jumped out in order to save his life.Years later he denied ever saying that Paul was dead.

hotman wrote

He does say Faul is the Devil but does not mention God being a woman!

Why would he? It's totally irrelevant to what he was talking about. He didn't talk about his record collection either.

But WHY did he say Faul was the Devil? He also said Faul was not human! That is very serious charge don't you think by someone that was at least somewhat close to the Beatles and seemed to know them fairly well! He also said he was worried about his safety! There have been mysterious deaths of people close to the Beatles (Mal Evans for example) so maybe he should be worried!

Post by Rubber Soul on Oct 2, 2017 19:33:17 GMT -5

In the video he says "No one could have survived a crash like that", but then says that perhaps 'he' (meaning Paul) could have jumped out in order to save his life.Years later he denied ever saying that Paul was dead.

hotman wrote Why would he? It's totally irrelevant to what he was talking about. He didn't talk about his record collection either.

But WHY did he say Faul was the Devil? He also said Faul was not human! That is very serious charge don't you think by someone that was at least somewhat close to the Beatles and seemed to know them fairly well! He also said he was worried about his safety! There have been mysterious deaths of people close to the Beatles (Mal Evans for example) so maybe he should be worried!

Post by hotman637 on Oct 3, 2017 11:40:54 GMT -5

But WHY did he say Faul was the Devil? He also said Faul was not human! That is very serious charge don't you think by someone that was at least somewhat close to the Beatles and seemed to know them fairly well! He also said he was worried about his safety! There have been mysterious deaths of people close to the Beatles (Mal Evans for example) so maybe he should be worried!

February 1-28Ends his time with May Pang.John and Yoko do interviews with Newsweek and Time magazine. John appears on Howard Cosell's ABC talk show and on ABC's Monday Night Football.

March 1Grammy Awards

March 2-31John spent much of this month with Yoko who also allowed him to see May Pang. John also underwent extensive dental work at this time. John and Yoko renewed their marriage vows on March 20 with a Drudic ritual. John spends a lot of time delving deeper into the occult and engaging in seances...was he trying to contact his mom Julia and Paul? From March 21-31 John spends a lot of time tripping mushrooms and sleeping.

April 1-27John and Yoko's movements are unknown and they mysteriously send May Pang to the UK to work at the Apple offices.

April 28John appears on Tom Snyder's Tomorrow show.

April 29-30Unknown

The Beatles Homes of 1975

FAULWoodlands Farm,Passmarch East-Sussex,UK

GEORGEHenley-On-Thames,Oxfordshire,UK

RINGOApartment in Monte CarloHome in AmsterdamRented house in L.A.Tittenhurst Park,Berkshire,UK

JOHNThe Dakota,NY,USA

Note- All of the Beatles except for John had homes in the UK during 1975.

Post by timmyb52 on Dec 9, 2017 22:25:11 GMT -5

The Beatles 1970-1975 Legal Info

Although The Beatles official partnership was dissolved in London High Court on January 9,1975...it was not legally absolved until April 9,1975.All of The Beatles revenue from 1970-1975 which had been frozen was allowed to be released on April 9 and divided equally among all four Beatles. Revenue earned individually through solo albums and concerts were not split among the four but was their own to keep.It is not clear if all four Beatles would have to be present in the UK in order to oversee the equal splitting of Beatles albums revenue or whether it would be deposited automatically in each Beatles bank accounts by an Overseer.If so,this would be a very strong motivator for John to chance a trip to the UK despite his visa issues IMHO.In 1975 this would not be very hard to do...it would only require John to wear a disguise and to have a fake Passport and ID...not hard for someone to do with John's connections and wealth to pull off.It is also worthy of mention that before this date that Yoko went into overdrive in order to get John back from May Pang....which we will have more to say about later on.If John,George,Paul and Ringo met with Stephen as claimed...it would have been around this early April timeframe as much of The Beatles movements cannot be accounted for.It is also of interest to note that George,Paul and Ringo were all living at this time in the UK...so, it would not be impossible for the 3 to have been in the UK to meet with Stephen. John would have required a little bit more effort to do so...but with all of that money to be divided amongst them on April 9...I think John would have chanced leaving the US to make sure he got his equal share of The Beatles revenue.The courtcases and lawsuits after 1970 were all about money and ego...any research into those areas make that abundantly clear.With that said...the meeting with Stephen would just have been a part of tying up loose business ends and interests while John was in the UK.Although we cannot with 100 percent confidence verify Stephen's claims...it is curious that the month of April is silent regarding The Beatles whereabouts and movements during that timeframe.In fact, and to be honest we see this a lot when trying to research The Beatles...there appears IMHO a shroud of secrecy around them.I also encountered this issue over and over again in regards to The Beatles and all those with close connections to them in wanting to keep these courtcases and lawsuits private and their internal issues kept from leaking out to the public.IMHO this privacy and secrecy seems to revolve around McCartney's {Faul's} problems with the contract signed by The Beatles in April of 1967.It is my belief this may have something to do with Paul's death and Faul taking over as his official replacement.Could it be that Faul had to sign this contract as William Campbell in 1967 and this is why Faul was having so much trouble in dissolving the group and his connection to it?Is this the contract that William signed as claimed in "The Memoirs of Billy Shears"?In that book...Faul brags how others in 1966 were hired to be Paul look-a-alikes...but how he was the one who got "the contract".Why is there so many problems centered around this April 1967 contract and not later ones? What makes that 1967 contract so special or different?My investigation into trying to verify Stephens claims has only raised more questions...sadly, questions that cannot be answered due to a lack of published information and data.Regardless, with Faul's court victory of 1975 which finally released him from his professional commitments to the other three Beatles...he was not wholly free of them.Apple Records was still all of theirs and it would keep them tied together forever...requiring them to all make joint decisions together in regards to Apple business.It is curious to note in relation to 1975 that with the passing of John Lennon in 1980 that Yoko was allowed to become a member of the board of Apple with Faul,George and Ringo.Did the Beatles really meet with Stephen and his mom in 1975? At this point in time it is impossible to answer that question satisfactorially since we lack information...however, it appears with the information we do have that the Beatles did have the means,time and ability to do so.In the end it must be left to the individual reader and researcher into these matters to make up their own minds with what information is available until more data is acquired.Before leaving this discussion altogether...I wish to add some observations concerning Yoko and Johns reunion in February of 1975 in the next day or so that may shed a little more light on this subject.

From April 9 {The date of the Beatles splitting the frozen revenues} to April 20th I could find no hard verification that George was recording Extra Texture in any biographies or online research but thought it best to add the possibility that he may have been.However, many of the books and online sources seem to agree that George began work on Extra Texture with Norman Kinney as engineer,recording the basic tracks for the new songs between 21 April and 7 May 1975, beginning with "Tired of Midnight Blue" and "The Answer's at the End".So...what was George up to during this April 9-20 timeframe? Was he partying in LA? Handling Dark Horse business...or was he in the UK?

The Beatles had possible cause to all be in the UK at that time since they were all about to get a lot of much needed money. All four Beatles had been living mostly off of loans given to them from Allen Klein and others beginning in 1970. All four Beatles were strapped for cash at this time and had many loans,fines and debts to pay off.The issue of the April 9th splitting of frozen funds was no trifle matter IMHO...it affected all four Beatles and their lifestyles immensely!I wish we had more information regarding how these "frozen funds" were distributed back to the Beatles...and I also wish we had more concrete data regarding where the Beatles were all at during that early April time frame.In Stephens statements and recounting of his meeting with the four Beatles it appears to me that the Beatles were in a hurry...they do not appear to spend a lot of time visiting Stephen and are quick to just shrug him off as not that big of a problem or issue and quickly leave.From April 9th to April 21st the Beatles are nowhere to be found at all...where were they?It is also interesting to note that with the coming splitting of the frozen funds on April 9th you have all four Beatles appearing to try to mend fences...especially John and Paul.With Allen Klein no longer representing George,Ringo and John {whom Faul hated}, and the animosity over money soon to be behind them...it appears to me in my research that the Beatles were going to get back together at that time.And that leads us to Yoko...who appears to me to have put a stop to it.Returning to Stephen...I think we have a little more weight now to add to his statements. We can now say with some degree of confidence that it was possible that this meeting happened, but unfortunately we cannot prove it with 100 percent certainty.That will require even more research and access to new information regarding the Beatles whereabouts from April 9th - April 21st.

Post by timmyb52 on Dec 9, 2017 22:25:55 GMT -5

Yoko - 1975

Yoko's actions during the 1975 timeframe in regards to getting John back from May Pang raises many questions.It is interesting that as the April 9th date neared that would allow the Beatles access to millions in frozen funds that Yoko became more persistent in her attempts to get John back under her sway.This was all achieved with a phone call to John from Yoko promising a cure from cigarette addiction through a new form of hypnosis that would require it being done at the Dakota.May Pang recallls feeling that Yoko was up to something since it seemed odd to her that this "hypnosis" could not be done at a doctor's office or with May Pang present. Even though she voiced these concerns to John...he simply waved them off as May just being paranoid and over protective.Yoko kept John for several days at the Dakota and would not allow May Pang to talk to him on the phone...claiming that John was always sleeping or in another round of rigorous hypnosis.When John finally arrived back to May he acted weird and appeared very zombie-like and out of it.The night before going to see Yoko...John had talked with Paul on the phone for some time about getting together in New Orleans and possibly writing together again now that Faul's original 1970 lawsuit against the other three Beatles had been resolved in January. May Pang reports that John was looking forward to this and very excited...but once he had left to go for Yoko's hypnosis and came back...it was forgetten, and John told May he was going back to Yoko for good.Before leaving May that day...John produced a "gift" from Yoko to give to May which consisted of a strange perfume which stunk.May was later told it was some kind of witches curse or voodoo curse which consisted of sulphur, arrow root and chili powder.From the moment that John went back to Yoko she took over all of his legal issues...even making the Allen Klein/Beatles lawsuit go away by securing an out of court settlement of 5 million dollars.Throughout the many books and internet information regarding Yoko and her entrance upon the Beatles scene...it is obvious to me that her goal was not just to "get a Beatle"...but to have a Beatle totally under her control.From the information and data gathered from 1975...Yoko's appears the most mysterious and self-serving.I wish to state here that Faul's 1970 lawsuit against the other 3 Beatles was not just about Allen Klein...it was also about money...plain and simple.The nitpicking and squabbling over money between the four Beatles can be seen clearly in Pete Doggett's book "You Never Give Me Your Money" and also throughout countless others.These battles over money were also battles over ego...they were petty and immature IMHO.With that said...this will lead into the reasons I have for believing that the Beatles on April 9th would have wanted to be present in the UK for the splitting of frozen funds...to ensure they were all given a fair and equal share and that none of the others would be given more than the rest.And you better believe that Yoko would have definitely wanted John to be there also...visa issues be damned.So...with my next post for tommorrow...I will be delving into a little bit of speculation in regards to why and how John might have indeed gone to the UK for the splitting of the frozen Beatles funds.

Post by timmyb52 on Dec 9, 2017 22:26:40 GMT -5

John and Yoko 1975

In my research in books and online it becomes obvious to one who does any real in depth research into The Beatles that Yoko Ono is a rather mysterious,controlling and dominating character when it comes to John's life.John's choice of Yoko as a life mate may not come as too much of a surprise to those who understand John's upbringing and early life experiences...especially as it relates to his Aunt Mimi and his mother Julia who died when he was young.Thus, it appears to me that Yoko {from the moment she entered John's life} created wedges between John's family,friends and co-workers in order to have his complete and undivided attention...and also so she could have total and complete control over him.IMHO...she wanted John not just for his wealth and celebrity...but to also further her own career.While Yoko had set-up May Pang to serve as John's lover so that she could concentrate on other things...she had not planned on John falling in love with her.This created several problems IMHO for Yoko if John decided to divorce her. It would cut her off from the celebrity and attention she gained from being Lennon's wife, it would cut her off from total access to his resources, and finally it would cut her off to aquiring more personal power.Yoko resorted to drastic measures to get John back that seems to have relied upon subconscious programming through hypnotic suggestion which was all perpetrated under the guise of freeing John from his addiction to cigarettes.Yoko also seems to have also used some sort of dark occultism on John also at that time.May Pang relates that at the same time that John gave her Yoko's "gift", that he also produced another one that Yoko had made for him to wear that consisted of rose,jasmine,gardenia and lemon oil. May Pang learned that this turned out to be some sort of love potion called "Come To Me", which produced a strong sexual impulse for the wearer to return to the giver.May Pandg also relates how John would tell her after he returned to Yoko that she would tell him that he no longer had to make music or perform.Again and again...from Yoko's entrance into John's life we see her determination to have complete control over John and his life.Later in a rare moment of honesty we have Julian Lennon stating his belief on live television that Yoko had planned everything from the beginning. He appears in this TV interview to be suggesting that Yoko had John killed and that she benefitted the most from his death.And to be honest...I concur with Julians assessment.Yoko got all of his wealth, became the star widow, and even gained a seat on Apples board...all the while getting rid of a man that she no longer loved or wanted to be married too.Yoko has always claimed that when she met Johnshe had no idea who he was, nor had she ever heard of The Beatles.But let us be logical and ask ourselves...who living in the 1960's had never heard of The Beatles or John Lennon?In another rare moment we have Faul on The Howard Stern Show making a classic slip up by relating how Yoko had come to his house before meeting John Lennon. Howard Stern caught this and asked Faul how could Yoko claim that she didn't know about The Beatles or John Lennon when it appears that she actually did?Faul appeared taken aback and realized that he had messed up...but just shrugs it off by not saying anymore about it.What dark secrets do Faul and Yoko share I wonder? Why would Faul who claims to be John's best friend cover for Yoko Ono?What "dirt" do they have on one another?It has always appeared odd to me that Faul and John also married within days of each other. Could there be a more "dark" reason for the quick marriages to Linda and Yoko I wonder? Were Linda and Yoko handlers? Were Faul and John somehow coerced into marrying these women?Another oddity which appears to me is that Linda and Yoko both never left Faul or John's side after the marriages and were always seen in their company at all times.Linda did not leave Faul's side until her death from cancer...and Yoko did not leave John's side until his death in 1980.I bring this all up to illustrate the hold that Yoko had over John...and that whatever Yoko told him to do he would do.Despite John's visa issues...Yoko would have insisted that John be present at the splitting of the frozen funds to insure that he got what was rightfully his share.Even if it might endanger Johnto being caught and having his visa revoked...it mattered very little to Yoko One since we are talking about a vast amount of wealth that she knew her and John sorely needed at that time.Even if this April 9th splitting of funds did not require John's presence to be in the UK in order to receive them it would have been in Yoko's interest and character to make sure John was there in order to make sure he did not get shorted by the other 3 Beatles {which they had been squabbling over since 1970}.Yoko would have convinced John to go to the UK and to see it as an "adventure" by wearing a disguise with a fake ID and passport. This suggestion by Yoko would have appealed to John's character and who was always "bored".Yoko would then make arrangements to have May Pang sent ahead of him to work in the UK Apple offices so that John could have a playmate there who would keep John from having relations with other women. This would explain why Yoko and John mysteriously had May Pang sent to the UK at that time. It is also possible that by relying on May Pang...Yoko knew that she had someone who would report to her on Johns activities while in the UK...after all, May Pang had been under the employ of the Lennons {especially Yoko}, for some time. It was also Yoko who had told May that she would serve as John's lover during The Lost Weekend period.May Pang did not come back to the US sometime until the end of April...and we don't see John appear again until April 28th when he appears on Tom Snyder's TV show.In fact...this also coincides very closely to George appearing back in LA to start recording his Extra Texture album sometime between the 21st and the 30th. Then Ringo appears out of nowhere and is seen on a TV Variety Show on the 28th also.This all seems like too much coincidence to me and appears to have been planned in a very methodical manner.You have all four Beatles dissapear and then reapper around the same time!In concluding this research into Stephen's claims...it is my belief that all four Beatles could have easily been in the UK to have met Stephen sometime in early to mid April since none of the Beatles whereabouts at that time can be verified with any degree of accuracy or certainty.And if anyone could have gotten John to go to the UK despite his visa problems {which were settled in October of that year}...it would have been the crafy and scheming Yoko Ono Lennon!

Post by timmyb52 on Dec 9, 2017 22:27:22 GMT -5

I also wish to address this Visa issue by asking the question...what would have happened if John had chanced to leave the US but got caught?It's true he may have indeed been denied his visa...but, we are not talking here about an ordinary person...we are talking about John Lennon, one of the most popular Beatles.The US government would have been in a real bind as to what to do going forward...should they revoke his visa chancing massive outrage from fans in the US and abroad?We should consider...that the US war in Vietnam {which had been hugely unpopular and which made the US look bad} was wrapping up...and that denying John Lennon a visa would make the US government look even worse.So...IMHO it would not matter if John left the country or not...or whether he was caught or not...because the US government would have decided to give John his visa rather than deal with the public outcry.The visa issue was IMHO inconsequential to John and Yoko's decision to have John attend the splitting of funds in the UK...if indeed this is what happened.Let us also suppose that John got caught and the US denied him his visa...what then? The worst thing that would happen is that John could not live in the USA...but what does that matter when you have a massive injection of wealth from the splitting of the frozen funds and can live anywhere else? The US government would also be aware of the massive amounts of money that John Lennon would bring to the economy through tourism,concerts,etc.It would be more in the interest of the US to allow John to stay they deny him his visa even if he did break his visa privileges.John and Yoko had even more to gain then to lose by chancing a trip by John incognito to the UK IMHO despite the visa issues.

I'm going to try and do some research into the subject of how these frozen funds would have been distributed after the ruling that came in January of 1975.When it comes to millions of dollars being split between four individuals along with their solo earnings it seems to me that this would not be an easy task and would require some time to work out. It does not appear to me as if it would be such a simple thing as depositing money into four separate bank accounts...especially when you have the matter of unpaid taxes on income to factor in also.This "splitting" of the money may have called for a week or more of time to sort out to everyones {including the taxman's} satisfaction.Unfortunately, the information in regards to this issue of the Beatles funds are strangely silent and it has been somewhat difficult to garner more information. I will try my best to find out more if I can.Addition -I have come across some more information in regards to the April 1967 contract and will share it with the forum once I have sorted it all out in relation to Faul's 1970 lawsuit against the other three Beatles to dissolve the group.

Post by timmyb52 on Dec 10, 2017 21:22:59 GMT -5

The April 1967 Contract - Background Info

The following quotations are taken from Peter Doggett's book "You Never Give Me Your Money" -2009

"The Beatles had first become incorporated as The Beatles Ltd - in 1963. The Beatles Ltd held the group's collective earnings after NEMS {Brian Epstein} took its 25 percent. Without realizing it, the Beatles had signed away a quarter of their income from 1962-1967.Other companies handled specific aspects of their career.Lennon and McCartney's song writing interests were controlled by Northern Songs Ltd, their income from Northern then passed into another holding company. The less substantial money accrues from Harrison's songwriting went into Harrisongs Ltd.Epstein formed Subafilms Ltd in early 1964 to handle the Beatles movie projects. After Lennon published two books, he was encouraged to form a seperate company to receive those book royalties. And their were similiar companies in the USA, not least Seltaeb Inc, the organization that famously signed away the Beatles rights to 90 percent of earnings from memorabilia sold in their name and likeness.

Epstein negotiated a new recording deal in January 1967 {this may have been the original contract later signed by William Campbell after he got the contract and not the April 1967 contract as previousl postulated}, whereby the Beatles promised to deliver 70 recordings in the next five years, and a guarenteed flow of albums until 1976 - either collectively or individually {It is intriguing to note that the possibility of the Beatles splitting up was already built into the deal}.

It was Brian Epsteins's brother Clive Epstein who guided the formation of a company that would save the Beatles from having to pay income tax. Instead of being four individuals sharing their income in The Beatles Ltd, they would become employees of a new corporation, The Beatles & Co. They would each own a 5 percent share in the firm, the remaining 80 percent being held by The Beatles Ltd - later renamed Apple Music Ltd in 1967, and Apple Corps Ltd in January 1968. Their earnings would now be subject to lower corporation tax rather then the higher income tax also allowing them to claim back their individual living expenses from the company as CEO's."

Note - At this point in Peter Doggetts book he gives an explanation for one of the Sgt.Pepper PID clues...make of this as you will.

"The first public acknowledgement of the new order {Apple Music Ltd} came with a cryptic reference to Apple on the sleave of Sgt.Pepper. By then {1967}, the Beatles were beginning to realize that their company could become a plaything as well as a tax dodge."

IMHO...it refers to both Apple Music Ltd and A Paul Music Ltd in honor to the dead Paul McCartney. With Apple Corps Ltd being a pun on A Paul Corpse Ltd.

It is also my opinion and belief that when The Beatles Ltd was renamed Apple Music Ltd in 1967 that this was the contract signed in April 1967 that may also have had the earlier William Campbell January 1967 contract amended to it which cemented the four Beatles as a partnership and which later in 1971 formed the basis of Faul's lawsuit against the other three Beatles to dissolve it in order to free Faul from his commitments as agreed to in January 1967 when he took over as leader of the band and as JPM's replacement.

I had previously also assumed that the splitting of the frozen funds in 1975 would be subject to income tax...it wouldn't be since The Beatles albums,movies and solo releases from 1971 - 1975 would all be subject only to corporate tax before the splitting of the funds was determined and handed out to each individual Beatle...guaranteeing them each even more money since it was all done under The Apple Corps Ltd umbrella.

Also of note;

"The National Archives in Kew,London allow public access to the complete transcript of the spring 1971 court action initiated by Paul McCartney to dissovle the Beatles partnership. Also included in the Archives are several hundred pages of documents relating to the Official Receiver's {James D.Spooner} work as effective boss of Apple Corps Ltd between 1971-1974..."

James D.Spooner was a partner in a London firm of accountants who was put in charge of overseeeing the Beatles frozen funds. It is very curious to note that although his wok inregards to the frozen funds is publicly recorded from 1971-1974 and are a matter of public record...it is strangely silent regarding the disbursel of the frozen funds to each individual Beatle in April of 1975.

Why?

Why is the period of April 1975 so silent in regards to this issue? And why are the Beatles movements and activities during this time frame also so silent?Is it just more than coincidence that all of this also coincides with Stephens claims concerning his meeting with the group?

Post by timmyb52 on Dec 10, 2017 21:42:57 GMT -5

Note -

The unfreezing of these funds would not have been deposited in John's US bank accounts...they would have to be deposited into his bank accounts in the UK after British corporate taxes were subtracted from the amounts due. The reason for this is because all these funds had been frozen in UK court and not US courts...also, because all of this money was made by UK companies {such as Apple,Northern Songs,etc.}

This may also be another reason why it would be important for John to go to the UK at this time...to be able to access those UK funds in his UK bank accounts and have them transferred to his US bank accounts. This would require his signature,physical approval to bank employees for verification of transfer of funds,etc. Especially when you are talking about huge amounts of money.I could be wrong about that...but in 1975 they did not have the means as they do today when it comes to verifying huge transfers on money...and it would require John to be physically present at the UK banks to do that IMHO.

Post by timmyb52 on Dec 10, 2017 22:12:12 GMT -5

Correction - I seemed to have missed these dates in my research and add them here for consideration;John gave an interview at The Dakota on April 4th.April 18th John Lennon played his last live performance at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York.However, we cannot determine John's whereabouts from April 5-17 and the 19-27th.